THE OPINION OF A Known Dissenter On the BILL for
Preventing Occasional Conformity.
WHAT is the publick Possession of Places, or Offices of Trust in a Government, to the Case of Religion? They who separate from the Communion of a Church, cannot in reason expect to be entertained in the Service of that very Church: And they that separate from the Church, ought to consider
Places
and
Offices
beforehand, and to examine whether they can forego them for their
Consciences
or not, and if they did so, they would not be so frequently foregoing their
Consciences
to possess them a
Gain.
And I cannot but wonder at, and condemn the Injustice of such
Dissenters,
who would have those People, to whose Communion they cannot or will not join, receive them into equal Advantages of
Honour
and
Profit,
of
Trust
and
Management,
in the Politick Concern.
I cannot approve the equity of it, nor I would not have the
Dissenters
covet it; nor had they the
Government
in their hands, would they admit it themselves.
This coveting
Offices
of
Trust, Honour
and
Profit,
in the Government, has been the cause of that
Occasional Compliance,
which to the Dishonour and Shame of the
Dissenters,
has Branded them with too much Levity in Religion.
For whoever dissents from an Establish'd Church on any account, but from a real Principle of
Conscience,
is a
Politick,
not a
Religious Dissenter.
Nothing can be Lawful and Unlawful at the same time. If it be not Lawful for me to Dissent, I ought to Conform, but if it be Unlawful for me to Conform I must Dissent; and he that cannot Die, or at least desire to do so, rather than Conform, ought to Conform.
If I shall Dissent, and yet at the same time Conform, by
Conforming
I deny my
Dissent
being Lawful; or by my
Dissenting,
I damn my
Conforming
as sinful.
An Act of Parliament is of every Mans own doing, and therefore 'tis just every Man should comply with the Terms or suffer the Penalty; but here is no Penalty, if no Crime, and if no Preferments are sought, no Honours accepted, there is no Crime; if Self-denial was as practicable as Self-advancement, here is no need of
Occasional Conformity,
for all such do seek the Crime, that is the first Sin, then Mortgage their
Consciences
to avoid the Penalty, and so add one Sin to another.
No Man can be said to separate from, and join to a thing at the same time, if your Conscience is satisfy'd in joining; it cannot be satisfy'd in separating, unless you can suppose your Conscience to be satisfy'd and dissatisfy'd both together.
A Man passively Religious, that can Communicate any where, may from the same Principle, and with far less guilt, Communicate no where, for he has prostituted the little Religion he had, if ever he had any, to his Interest.
No
Occasional Conformist
can be receiv'd into Communion in any
Dissenting Assembly,
upon any other Terms than as a
Penitent;
for this Practice is prepostrous, excentrick and destructive of the very Foundation of the
Dissenters
Principles.
Methinks Men should seem what they are, if a Man dissent from the Church let him do so, and his Principle being well-grounded for such Dissent, let him hold it; if not well-grounded, let him leave it, if he cannot suffer one way, let him suffer another, and why should we not be as honest to God as our Country?
'Tis an intolerable Affront to the
Church of England,
reflecting upon its
Doctrine
as well as
Practice,
to make use of the
Church
for a
Cover
to fence them against the Laws, at the same time continuing to Disown its
Communion
as a thing not fit to be continued in.
Conformity
and
Nonconformity
at the same time, in one and the same Person, for a Secular End, to save a penalty, and privately; and then, as being asham'd of it, to go back and sit down as not having done it at all, are Contradictions I must insist upon, and rather wish, than expect to see rectify'd.
He who dissents from the Establish'd Church, except from true Principles of Conscience, is guilty of a great Sin.
He who Conforms to the Establish'd Church against his Conscience, is guilty of a great Sin.
He who both Dissents and Conforms at the same time, and in the same point of Religion, must be guilty of one of these great Sins.
And he who has committed either of these Sins, ought not to be receiv'd again on either side, on any other Terms than a
Penitent.
As to
Partial Conformity,
Dissent in some things, and Conforming in others, does not seem to concern this Case, no Man among the
Dissenters
pretended to dissent in every thing, but we are speaking of conforming in those very Points in which we dissent, and that no less than the
Article of Communion.
If Gentlemen who have such a Latitude in their Opinions, wou'd not have it thought they are moved to it by their Interests, let them practise it openly, and not Time it so, to the every
Eve
of an Election, as to have it speak of it self, and, as it were, force Men to believe it done on purpose; nay, let them not put such a Reproach in the Mouths of their Enemies, as to have it spoken in contempt, with circumstances that stop the Mouths of Argument, and are as Convincing as Demonstration.
'Tis not a light thing to shift and change Communion with an Establish'd, and with a Separate Church, as often as convenience, or Reason of State or Interest invite.
As to the Excuse that is made, That this is no
Conformity
in Point of Religion, but done as a Civil Action, in Obedience to the Laws of the Land, as a Qualification for admittance into Publick Employments, which they think it their Duty to accept, in order to Serve their Country; are not Sacraments Religious Acts? Are they not the same thing, tho' differently Administred in the Establish'd, and in the Dissenting Church? And how can you take it as a Civil Action in one place, and a Religious Act in another? This is playing
Bo peep
with God Almighty, and no Man can tell when they are about a Civil Action, and when about a Religious. And if the Service of their Country be so dear to them, pray why should they not undergo the Penalties, and chuse to expose their Bodies and Estates for that Service, rather than their Souls? These are Patriots indeed! that will damn their Souls to save their Country! For, as hath been observ'd,
Conformity
is a Sinful Act in a
Dissenter,
or else his dissenting before and after must be a Sinful Act; and he has no Excuse, unless it be that he was convinc'd and re-convinc'd, and then convinc'd again.
After description of true
Protestant Dissenters,
who cannot conform, he proceeds in this manner: If there are crept into their Company
State-Dissenters,
or
Politick-Dissenters,
they are not of them, and we wish they would go out from them. I see no Act of Parliament a making to the prejudice of this
Dissenter.
—This is the
Dissenter
to which Her Majesty has promis'd her Protection. The Act against
Occasional Conformity
does not concern us, I dare undertake not one
Dissenter
offer'd to present a Petition to the Honourable House against its passing; they who can conform for one Reason, may conform without two, and ought to conform. And we are therefore content to be distinguish'd who cannot conform at all; if we have any Knaves amongst us, take them; if we have any Hypocrites, any who can conform and do not, we are free to part with them, that the remainder may be all such as agree with the true Character of a
Conscientious Dissenter.
'Tis plain, that
Occasional Communion
is contrary to the very Nature and Being of a
Dissenter,
who, if he can conform, ought to conform; and if he can for a Place of Preferment, ought to do it without the Preferment.
It is an Act destructive of all possible pretence for dissenting, and never was, nor never can be defended by any
Dissenter,
without overthrowing all the Reasons they could ever give for dissenting; How then can this Bill be aim'd at the
Dissenters?
We hold it to be a Novelty, an Abuse crept in amongst us, and we are glad to have it condemn'd by Authority. We are so content with the suppressing the grievance of this scandalous Ambidexter
Conformity,
that we think the Hardships put upon us with it not worth the naming.
All the Parliaments that ever were, or will be, can never suppress any thing amongst us so scandalous to our Reputation, and to that Candour with which we desire to guide our Actions, nor so contrary to, and destructive of the very Nature of our separating from the
Church of England,
and the Constitution of all our Collected Congregations; and therefore, if these
Occasional Conformists
would accept of the Friendly Advice of their Brethren, it should be, That they would for the future conform to the
Church of England.
As for his Authority to write thus in the Name of the
Dissenters,
he alledges that he hath the General Concurrence of all the
Dissenters
he ever convers'd with, that Publication is an Appeal to the World, and if he hath affirm'd any thing in the Name of the
Dissenters
which is not their Opinion, he is liable to an easie Confutation:
Truth
(says he)
is a General Commission, and any Man may write it.
He modestly conceals his Name, that his Reasons might not come clogg'd with the dead weight of the Meanness and Imperfections of the Author: The
Occasional Conformity
of
Dissenters
(says he) is not Condemn'd or Defended by the Names of Authors on either side, but by Truth, Scripture and Reason; and so far as that is on his side, he thinks it ought not to be despis'd for being usher'd in by an Unworthy Instrument.
LONDON:
Printed, and are to be sold by
J. Nutt
near
Stationers Hall.
1703.